It is certainly not easy to be white nowadays. On the Chinese version of the World Wide Web, “White Left” is a term loosely referring to white people who hold left-wing political views. The phrase has acquired negative popularity on various Chinese social media such as Weibo and Zhihu, the Chinese equivalence of Twitter and Quora, since the European refugee crisis and the latest US election. Those Chinese netizens who oppose “White Left” are not necessarily Trump, or right-wing supporters, but they relentlessly criticise the prevalent left-wing politics in North America, the European Union and Australia, regions where white residents are the majority. We should not forget that Karl Max himself is white and politically left too. It is a peculiar case worth examining in the context of surging Chinese nationalism. By writing this essay, I am not criticising left-wing politics in the West nor the nationalistic feelings in China. I simply want to know why Chinese netizens hate left-wing politics so much? And in particular, why do they target at white people?
Left-wing politics have been traditionally associated with government intervention, income redistribution policies and political liberalism. Very often, “ White Left” value equality and social egalitarianism while believing that most social inequalities are inherently unjust and should be abolished via sometimes radical political reforms. In particular, “left elites” refer to people who hold left-wing political opinions while acquiring a high level of education and social statues. Although eliminating social inequalities sounds attractive if not idealistic, the flaws of left-wing politics have been “well articulated” by young, enthusiastic Chinese netizens. On Zhihu, where people discuss why people hate “White Left” so much, one of the most voted responses narrates a story:
In Australia, after a guy overdosed and died, his mother was tramatised. Isn’t she supposed to join anti-heroine campaigns and prevent teenagers from substance-abuse? Guess what? She joined an organisation that asks the government to provide free drug quality tests so that their children can overdose without worrying about killing themselves! The tax payers should pay for those quality tests, of course.
The tone ridicules the mother’s reaction and implicitly suggests that the mother made the wrong choice, adding unnecessary financial burden on the government without addressing the root cause, namely illegal drug trades. In the end, tax payers have to pay for the stupidity of such “White Left”. If the criticism above is still too subtle, we shall examine the next quote (warning: strong language):
They blame Chinese factories for ruining the environment while setting their air-con (imported from China) forever at 15 Degree Celsius. They find Chinese people barbaric for eating dogs while they consume tons of beef in America. They keep fighting in the Middle East for no reason without ever admitting that their so-called Muslim civil protests in China are in fact terrorist activities too. That is the essence of those rich, hypocritical “White Left”. Their love is not true love, but narcissism. Those bitchy Virgin Mary(s) never care about other people’s interests but only their own sense of moral superiority. They invent the term “political correctness” which is quickly becoming absurd and revolting in recent years.
It seems to me that social media can easily be used for irrational discussions and hate speeches not just on Twitter or Facebook, but also on Weibo and Zhihu. In that sense, hate speeches do not discriminate. I do struggle initially to understand where these insults are coming from because they by no means present systematic arguments but only irrational complaints. The proposed instances of stupidity, pretentiousness and narcissism by no means represent “White Left” as a whole but only serve as a lazy simplification. Left-wing politics can be extremely complex among white people, and interpretations of social justice vary among left-wing political parties and politicians. In fact, I think that these bitter insults reflect certain intellectual nativity of the netizens who pose them online.
I am only starting to get a sense of why they hate “White Left” so much after thinking of the examples they propose. These examples seem to reflect a common theme: a fake, narcissist sense of moral superiority fueled by utter ignorance. I also sense some negative cohesion after these netizens pose an imaginable, hostile enemy with threatening economic or socio-political ideologies. Does such negative cohesion unite these young, enthusiastic netizens under a common identity to some extent? To me, these comments certainly draw the boundary between “us” and “them” clearly while positing a more assertive Chinese identity. These online complaints often target at left elites who fight to persuade others to fight social inequalities and support political reforms. These white elites obviously do not please the Chinese who find them hypocritical, spoiled, ignorant and applying double standards. Specifically, they find these “White Left” apply double standards on China; they have not come to learn about China but instead, kept criticising Chinese policies. They might not understand the particular economic or social circumstance about China, but that does not stop them from having strong criticisms. I am reminded of the debate between universalism and relativism. While some might argue that certain issues or moral standards could be universal across time and location, others find such conviction naive and idealistic.
Are these online complaints about “White Left” totally ridiculous? I do not think so. In fact, they might have a point to make, although that point does not necessarily target at white people or left-wing politics per se. These negative comments about “White Left” reflect certain dissatisfaction towards the America-led first world’s unfair treatment and the biased understanding of China, or anywhere not in the first world. In the so-called world order established by developed countries in the West, China might find itself marginalised and its perspective unacknowledged. The discourse is not necessarily political, but more cultural, if not civilisational. These Chinese netizens might feel that as China quickly rises to become a noteworthy world power after a century of humiliation by Western Imperialism and “Japanese Barbarism”, the old-fashioned, biased, America-led world order should be challenged and abolished. Such demand acquires more popularity under the Xi Jinping administration, during which his ambitious, enticing Chinese-Dream slogan advocates for an epic revival of “Chinese glory” in the modern world. The popularity of “White Left” criticism is a product of surging nationalistic feelings among the Chinese, in additional socio-political crisis and the rise of anti-globalisation, extreme-ring-wing politics in the West. The Chinese dissatisfaction towards “White Left” is not coincidental. In fact, it strives in a turbulent era of scepticism towards the old world order and the overwhelming irrationality of social media. The criticism is not necessarily about white people or left-wing politics; it’s about the discriminating world order and the first world’s sometimes hypocritical sense of moral superiority.
So is there any lesson to be drawn from the debate? It is unfortunate that these online criticisms on Weibo or Zhihu very often fall into the same sort of ideological brainwashing and intellectual nativity that their portrayed “While Left” are guilty of. In that sense, these criticisms of “White Left” are self-defeating. Still, if we take the essence of the debate seriously and get rid of all the irrational, hateful comments, we do have something to take note. How come what sounds politically correct turns out to be bizarre, unacceptable and honestly ridiculous? Although left-wing politics are concerned with social justice, multiculturalism and tolerance, regressive left-wing politics may encourage paradoxical views and a hypocritical sense of moral superiority. On an individual level, such sense of moral superiority might allow certain educated, wealthy elite to bypass legal constrains and reinforce their social privileges. On an international level, does such sense of moral superiority encourage some first world countries to bypass international consensus and regulations to reinforce their privileges in a rapidly changing world? That is something worth thinking about.
CARPE NOCTEM 